Register Register

Author Topic: Possible Total Warfare Errata and clarification of Strafing p. 243  (Read 2050 times)

snrdg091012

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 127
Evening PDT,

The BT Strafing rules in TW on p. 243 with Errata 4.2 and 4.4 does in my opinion have the feel of strafing attacks I've seen in history documentaries, in war movies, and on the video clips found on the Internet.

My quibble with the rule is that strafing can only be done with non-ammo using direct fire energy weapons when real world sources, FASA TRO 3026, and BT Master Units List Battle Value list autocannon and short range missiles.

Aircraft today are using the BT equivalent of machine guns and autocannons for strafing. In FASA BT the MechBuster Conventional Fighter uses an AC/20 to strafe a Mech and the two variants carried either three medium laser or four SRM 6 racks.

I've checked the BT Master Units List Battle Value p. 182 that lists five variants of which three identify weapons carried as laser, LB-X, and SRM. The Mary variant I have no idea what weapon is used and the Standard I think is the one using an AC/20.

The wording of "The unit may fire one, some or all of its non-ammo-dependent direct-fire energy and pulse weapons when strafing." in the second paragraph, third sentence is at odds what the original FASA details listed and what is shown in the BT Master Units List Battle Value.

Recommendation:
Strafing
Second paragraph, third sentence
The unit may fire one, some or all of its non-ammo-dependent direct-fire energy and pulse weapons when strafing.
Change to:
The unit may fire one, some or all of its non-ammo-dependent direct-fire energy (Medium and large lasers), direct fire ballistic weapons, or SRM launchers when strafing.

Next I would like verify my understanding of how to handle "The attacking player makes separate to-hit rolls for each weapon against each target. Apply weapon hits using the standard rules for the appropriate unit type."

A fighter has 15 weapons installed (5 in each wing and 5 in the nose) makes a strafing run through 5 hexes.

In Hex 1 there are 5 targets. The first target takes one hit leaving 14 weapons that need to be roll for the next four targets. The two more target in the hex get hit leaving twelve weapons that need to check hits on any targets in Hex 2. In each hex the remaining weapons check for hits reducing the number for each hit. Leaving Hex five any weapons that did not get a hit are wasted without doing damage.

Do I have the right idea on how to strafe targets using the Strafing rule?
Tom R (aka snrdg091012)

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5394
Re: Possible Total Warfare Errata and clarification of Strafing p. 243
« Reply #1 on: 28 September 2017, 23:42:21 »
Problem is you are comparing FASA rules to Total Warfare. TW supercedes the older rules so there isn't a comparison to be made. As the devs have said though you can use whichever rules you want, but as for tournement you have to use the most recent.

As for what hits.. pretty sure each weapon strikes each target in each hex so each unit would get struck by all 15 weapons which is more like RL strafing.

snrdg091012

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 127
Re: Possible Total Warfare Errata and clarification of Strafing p. 243
« Reply #2 on: 20 October 2017, 02:28:55 »
Hello phoenixstorm,

Problem is you are comparing FASA rules to Total Warfare. TW supercedes the older rules so there isn't a comparison to be made. As the devs have said though you can use whichever rules you want, but as for tournement you have to use the most recent.

As for what hits.. pretty sure each weapon strikes each target in each hex so each unit would get struck by all 15 weapons which is more like RL strafing.

Thank you for the reply and my apologies for the delay in getting back here. I've been away from the forum and failed to click notify, which means I did not get notifications and I was not bright enough to click on show new replies to your posts.

I was comparing the Catalyst Game Labs rules with real life and the material that the latest rule set is based on.

I've looked at a lot of real world strafing clips on the Internet and watched historical programs that have strafing in them. You can see the strafing path and see the rounds walking their way to the target. In one clip an aircraft is strafing a merchant ship. You see the being of the run walking towards, I think, the port side kicking up the water. The rounds that hit the water did not hit merchant ship. The rounds start hitting the ship and then you see rounds splashing on the other side as the plane pulls out of the run.

Another clip shows an airplane strafing a train. You see the rounds walking towards the train and tracks. At some point the guns get the right range and rounds start working their way towards the engine. You also see rounds missing the target.

These clips show aircraft that are using what are I believe BT direct fire ballistic weapons.

I admit to not really knowing how a laser or similar direct fire energy weapon works, but my impression is that when the beam hits the target the beam's energy is released.

A pulse laser might act like the machine guns and other ballistic weapons would get similar results.

I do realize that to make the game playable a lot of simplification is made. I may not agree with the rules, but I will use them as written.

Thank you again for the reply and help.

Tom R (aka snrdg091012)

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 38790
  • Carpe Arcanum Cibum
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Possible Total Warfare Errata and clarification of Strafing p. 243
« Reply #3 on: 21 October 2017, 23:18:55 »
I was comparing the Catalyst Game Labs rules with real life and the material that the latest rule set is based on.

This is an extremely bad idea. Best case scenario, you get migraines. Worst case, they never go away.

Never.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

snrdg091012

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 127
Re: Possible Total Warfare Errata and clarification of Strafing p. 243
« Reply #4 on: 22 October 2017, 09:32:55 »
Hello Weido,

This is an extremely bad idea. Best case scenario, you get migraines. Worst case, they never go away.

Never.

The only way reviewing the previous material and comparing them with the real world in my opinion is when someone demands that the entire rule set be re-written to bring the rule set to match the individual's point of view.

In my case I indicated that the topic "might be possible errata" and asked for clarification. Both the possible errata and clarification concerns have been cleared up with the help from you and the other forum members.

I, crossing my toes since I have enough problems with typing without crossed fingers, did not get a migraine and I have made a note in my PDF that my idea was out to lunch.

Thank you for the reply and help.
Tom R (aka snrdg091012)

 

Register